The Bloated Public University Bureaucracy

In a must-read expose this past weekend, the Wall Street Journal examined the level of administrative bloat at the University of Minnesota.  By the Journal's reckoning, based on U.S Department of Education data, our state University is the most bloated large research university in the nation.

To be fair, the Journal detailed efforts of the current University President, Eric Kaler, and his immediate predecessor, Robert Bruininks, to reduce the bureaucracy at the state's flagship institution of higher education.  The biggest hurdle to reform was the lack of good data on administrative costs.  As one version of the old saw goes, you can't manage what you don't measure.

Minnesota's Green Energy Follies, Part 1

More than most people, I understand the reality that elections have consequences.  The fallout from last month's result--which gave Minnesota's version of the Democrat party (DFL, Democrat-Farmer-Labor) complete control of state government for the first time in a generation--has already begun.

For reasons that I will get into in Part 2, Minnesota's energy policies are likely to see some of the biggest changes as the result of moving to one-party rule.

Minnesota's Competing Narratives

A brief excerpt from the perpetually forthcoming book:

One way to view Minnesota's political battles over the last ten years is in the context of a longer-running conflict over the dominant narratives of the Minnesota story--the rugged individual of the Frontier vs. the mass collective of the Minnesota Miracle. 

An older narrative of Minnesota grounds our history in the pioneer families (think Little House on the Prairie)—having left the stasis of the Old Europe, or moving from “back East”—building  new lives in a new land.  Of course, this story tends to leave out those who came even earlier:  the native tribes and the French explorers and trappers who left their place names across our landscape.

"A Great Deal of Ruin"

On alternating days, it seems, a piece of economic news emerges that either gives the optimists cause for joy or reinforces the gloom of the pessimists.

Truth be told, our reality lies somewhere in the middle.  One remarkable aspect of our economy (and by extension, our society) is its resilience.  In the teeth of recession, new businesses open.  Almost defying the headlines, new investments are made, risks are taken, and plans are made.

Scottish economist Adam Smith recognized the phenomenon more than two centuries ago.  When a young man decried the alleged decline of the age, "If we go on at this rate, the nation must be ruined," Smith replied: “Be assured, my young friend, that there is a great deal of ruin in a nation.”[1]

In the perpetually forthcoming book, we speculate on just how much more ruin our nation can withstand.

No Man is Safe While Congress is in Session

"No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the Congress is in session."

The above quote easily could be extended to any government agency.  At no time has the sentiment been more true than today.

The venerable magazine The Economist took on the issue of America’s regulatory state early this year in an excellent cover story on “Over-regulated America.”[1]  Writing chiefly about our environmental regulations and after listing a few hilarious examples of other regulations, The Economist’s editors argue,

But red tape in America is no laughing matter.  The problem is not the rules that are self-evidently absurd.  It is the ones that sound reasonable on their own but impose a huge burden collectively.  America is meant to be the home of laissez-faire.  Unlike Europeans, whose lives have long been circumscribed by meddling governments and diktats from Brussels, Americans are supposed to be free to choose, for better or for worse.  Yet for some time America has been straying from this ideal.

Walter Russell Mead on the meaning of Advent

Once again this Holiday Season, Walter Russell Mead is blogging about the meaning of Advent and Christmas in an excellent series of essays.  His 2012 efforts are must reads,

• Part 3: the Grand Entrance
• Part 2: the Coming
• Part 1

Saving the Middle Class

[A repost of a book excerpt from earlier this year]

Is America's middle class in danger?  In October 2011, Anne Applebaum wrote an opinion piece in the U.K.’s Daily Telegraph— “Can America survive without its backbone, the middle class?”—and put forward this thesis,

I would argue that the growing divisions within the American middle class are far more important than the gap between the very richest and everybody else.  They are important because to be “middle class”, in America, has such positive connotations, and because most Americans think they belong in it.  The middle class is the “heartland”; the middle class is the “backbone of the country”.  In 1970, Time magazine described Middle America as people who “sing the national anthem at football games – and mean it”.[1]

Unfortunately, so much government policy is aimed at helping lower income families—through social welfare programs—and upper income people—through subsidies for the “Creative Classes” and outright crony capitalism, that the middle class, the middle-middle, ends up getting squeezed out.

On the Wireless Tonight!

Listen to radio AM1130 tonight.  I'll be a guest on the Late Debate with Jack and Ben at 9 pm.

Avoiding "Sherpa Conservatism"

[Prototype for "The Column"]

Over the next few months, in the wake of the recent elections, Republicans and conservatives at every level (national, state, local) will (and should) be engaged in a big rethink of who we are and what we are about.  Clearly, the current approach is not working well enough.

Those on the other side, in an uncharacteristic bout of apparent helpfulness, suggest that Republicans need to return to the halcyon days of the "moderate Republican."  This political creature was quick to compromise and always looking for ways to split the difference.  I'm all for improving the tone and working constructively, but limits need to be set.

Columnist Jonah Goldberg has coined a phrase for this "moderate" approach to politics:  Sherpa Conservatism.  Writing in National Review, Goldberg describes Sherpa Conservatism as follows,

"Good conservatives... should know their place and gladly serve as Sherpas to the great mountaineers of liberalism, pointing out occasional missteps, perhaps suggesting a slight course correction from time to time, but never losing sight of the need for upward 'progress' and happily carrying the extra baggage for progressives in their zealous but heroic quest for the summit."

The Perpetually Forthcoming Book

Before my recent adventures in electoral politics, I was rolling out parts of a book on government reform under the nom de guerre "Private Citizen."  So far, I have reissued three excerpts that can be found here

• "More Admirals Than Ships" explores the bureaucratic animal
• "Education" more money is not the answer
• "The Reform Agenda" whatever can't go on forever, won't

Why Don't The Streets Get Plowed Anymore?

My latest essay is posted above under the tab "Let is Snow."  Large urban centers in the North depend on timely snow removal to stay open for business during the long winters.  Unfortunately, such mundane tasks no longer hold the attention of our leaders.

More Admirals Than Ships

[Editors Note:  Late last winter, before embarking on my adventures in electoral politics, I started the process of excerpting sections of my book over at the still slumbering Private Citizen Media site.  As a public service, I will bring over those items, piece-by-piece, for temporary housing here, until a more permanent location can be found.]

Back in March, The American Interest's Walter Russell Mead took Midwestern (specifically Minnesota) Republicans to task in a blog post for failing "to turn voters’ urgent concerns...into a politically sustainable program for deep change."  Mead observed that,

"Rather than propose innovative new ideas toward a vision for the future, the Midwestern GOP is projecting a message about what they are against.  Those who want to get beyond blue need to think more creatively about the next steps."

Thus chastened, over at Private Citizen we offered this except from our perpetually forthcoming book as a partial down payment on that program for deep change.

“The nearest approach to immortality on earth is a government bureau"

--South Carolina politician James F. Brynes

Count us in favor of both government reform and reduced spending.  Simply voting less money is the easy part.  How to change business as usual is more difficult, especially when government is part of the problem.  Quoting Walter Russell Mead,

Government is inevitably going to be part of the solution for these problems—if only by correcting so many of the misguided policies that in many cases make existing conditions worse. [1]

So reform, yes, but what kind of reform?  To answer that question, we need to go back to the beginning and cover a little economic theory.

A government program, once created, develops its own constituencies—the direct recipients who want to continue getting benefits, bureaucrats whose careers depend on the program’s existence, not to mention the lobbyists and advocates who will go to bat for a program, if it were threatened.

Carousel of Regress

I've posted a new essay above about the future of energy policy.  Enjoy!

Obama Vetoes Carbon Tax?

Today's man bites dog headline from the Wall Street Journal's editorial page declares "Obama Vetoes a Carbon Tax—in Europe."  We've finally found a tax he doesn't like!

Honduras Nixes Charter Cities

Honduras says "no" to charter cities. 

Electric Grid Reliability

In the wake of Hurricane Sandy, National Geographic looks at the issue of electric grid reliability and quotes the University of Minnesota's Massoud Amin.

...And I'm Back

As promised, it is November and I have returned.

Congratulations to Ron Erhardt for his victory in yesterday's election.

Taking a Break

As I gear up my campaign for House District 49A, I will be taking a break from this effort.  See you in November!

On to the Next Round

The Edina Patch has a story today about the result of last week's endorsing convention for Minnesota Senate District 49 Republican candidates.

A Big Thank You to SD 49!

I want to thank all the SD49 delegates who came out this evening for an exercise in "Jeffersonian" democracy!  The hard work begins now!

America and the Value of 'Earned Success'

Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal published an opinion piece by Arthur Brooks on the idea of earned success as the key to personal happiness.  It's available to all (not just subscribers).

It begins with this provocative sentence,

"I learned to appreciate the American free enterprise system by quitting a job in Spain."

A California Warning

Self-described "Truman Democrat" Joel Kotkin writes about how "California’s slow-motion tragedy could end up as a national one."

Edina Patch on the 49A Endorsement Race

The Edina Patch website reported this week on the GOP endorsement race for House seat 49A.

Republican Weatherman, Part 2

In an interesting "man bites dog" story, famous climate alarmist James Lovelock now says...never mind.  At least for now.  MSNBC reports that Lovelock now admits,

“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing.  We thought we knew 20 years ago.  That led to some alarmist books–mine included–because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened,” Lovelock said.

 “The climate is doing its usual tricks.  There’s nothing much really happening yet.  We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now,” he said.

Now he tells us.

Walter Russell Mead's take on the story gets to the heart of the matter,

"our concerns about the climate movement center on its weakness for cockamamie policy ideas and its propensity to over hype the evidence.  Alarmist predictions become a tool for stampeding the public toward crazy policy ideas with large costs and little hope of success."

Speaking of no success, the guys behind the Breakthrough Institute report that emissions are declining in the U.S. but not in Europe,

"It wasn't that long ago that the U.S. was cast as the global climate villain, refusing to sign the Kyoto accord while Europe implemented cap and trade.

"But, as we note below in a new article for Yale360, a funny thing happened: U.S. emissions started going down in 2005 and are expected to decline further over the next decade, while Europe's cap and trade system has had no measurable impact on emissions.  Even the supposedly green Germany is moving back to coal.

"Why?  The reason is obvious: the U.S. is benefiting from the 30-year, government-funded technological revolution that massively increased the supply of unconventional natural gas, making it cheap even when compared to coal."

And the lesson for policy makers?

"The contrast between what is happening in Europe and what is happening in the U.S. challenges anyone who still thinks pricing carbon and emissions trading are more important to emissions reductions than direct and sustained public investment in technology innovation."

It's all about making clean energy cheaper, not conventional energy more expensive.

Now comes Republican weatherman Paul Douglas, in part 2 of his series, doubling down on the "old" Lovelockian climate view.  Douglas asks,

"When will American business wake up to the scientific reality of climate change?"

Which reality, Paul?  The circa 2006 view of apocalyptic climate change that Lovelock was promoting then, or the new, pragmatic view that Lovelock admits to today?

Not keeping up with current events, Douglas continues to recommend the same-old-same-old,

"If we don’t jump on these new opportunities we risk conceding leadership to China, Asia and Europe, where there has been no substantial “debate” about climate science for years.  They have accepted the facts as facts."

Oh, well.  Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

Campaign Site is Up

I've put up a rudimentary web site for the 49A campaign.

49A Candidate Forum Tonight

Along with the rest of the candidates for house seat 49A, I will be at the Calvary Lutheran Church tonight for our Senate District's regular monthly meeting.  From 7 to 7:30, we will have a candidate's forum.  Come and learn more about us and the issues facing Edina.

Joel Kotkin on the California exodus

The Wall Street Journal interviews Joel Kotkin on why the middle class is fleeing California.

Leading By Example

Peggy's Noonan's column in the Wall Street Journal this week is on America's Crisis of Character.  Sobering stuff.

Declining Trust in American Institutions

The National Journal picks up on the theme that Americans are losing faith in our institutions.

Sue Jeffers' Radio Show

If all goes according to plan, I will be a guest on Sue Jeffers' radio talk show this Saturday (Earth Day!).  Tune in at 1 p.m. on 1130 AM.

The Cost of Wind Power

Tom Steward of the Freedom Foundation has a piece up on the cost of wind power to Minnesota's rural electric ratepayers.

The Future of Jobs

Walter Russell Mead has started a new series of posts over at his blog on the future of jobs in our changing economy.

Part 2 is now up.

Getting to the Future, First

Over at Private Citizen Media, I have been serializing the forthcoming book.  I'm now up to eight excerpts, covering various topics. 

• A Great Deal of Ruin--America's resiliency tested
• Winning the Future--Some thoughts on public education funding
• Getting to the Future, First--An alternative to the Blue Social Model
• The Gathering Storm--Decline is a choice
• Take Away Politics--Reform of the social welfare state
• More Admirals Than Ships--A Government 2.0 reform program
• The Regulatory Leviathan--How the regulatory state strangles the economy
• The "Frontier" vs. the "Miracle"--Minnesota's competing narratives

Single Point of Failure

An industrial accident at a single facility in Germany may bring the worldwide auto industry to a halt.  A black swan event is playing out.

Truth and Truthiness

As the narrative keeps shifting, Victor Davis Hanson notes that the "truth" becomes harder to pin down.

Faith and the Economy

Still catching up from last week:  in Forbes, Joel Kotkin discusses the role of religion in the broader economy.

If you can get past the gratuitous Rick Santorum swipe, there is some great material in here, such as,

"Social networks, much celebrated among the single, might provide people with voices, but religious organizations actually do something about meeting real human needs."

Tonight at Southdale Library

I'll be at Edina's Southdale Library (70th St. and York Ave) to discuss Sustainable Development tonight at 7 pm.  Swing by if you have the chance.

The Late Debate with Jack and Ben

The April 10 podcast captures my latest visit to the Late Debate with Jack and Ben radio show.

California's War on the Suburbs, Part 2

This past weekend, demographer Wendell Cox writes about California's continued war on the suburbs in the Saturday Wall Street Journal.  Complete with a six minute video.

The Blue Social Model and Election 2012

Mickey Kaus is drawing attention to this piece by John Ellis, which argues that Mitt Romney needs to offer an alternative to Barack Obama that addresses Walter Russell Mead's thoughts on the collapse of the "Blue Social Model."  The point that Kaus and Mead are making is that these (Mead's) ideas need to be hashed out and now.

Epilogue on "Tiered" Natural Gas Rates

Longtime readers will recall a series of posts last year on the subject of "inverted" block rates, or "tiered" rates for natural gas.

A quick recap, under "tiered" rates, the more natural gas you used, the higher the price you paid.  Of course, if you use more you pay more, but this system is more like charging a Prius driver $2/gallon for gasoline, while charging an SUV owner $5 per gallon.

A natural gas utility tried out the concept but was ordered by our state's utilities commission to drop the program, after a storm of protest.  Now it turns out that the utility has to refund some of the money it collected from customers who were innocent.

In calculating the penalty price, each user's natural gas monthly consumption was compared to the "average" user.  Above average users paid a higher price, below average users got a discount.

But wait.  It was discovered that some gas customers got bumped into the higher price bracket because the utility calculated usage based on a 32-day month, in some cases higher than 40-day "months."  Yes, your gas usage will look high if the utility counts 40 days of your usage and compares your figure to 31 days for an average user.

Unbelievable.

Energy Independence, After All

Newsweek's Robert Samuelson writes about the domestic fossil fuel energy revolution.

Paul Douglas, Republican Weatherman

The first time I ever saw TV-weatherman Paul Douglas in person was back in the late 1990's.  He was standing in line in front of me at the (original) "pork-chop-on-a-stick" concession at the Minnesota State Fair.

It turns out that we share something else in common, besides a love for porcine Fair fare.  We are both Republicans.  At least, "moderate Republican" is how Mr. Douglas describes his political leanings in a widely flogged opinion piece appearing, among many venues, at The Huffington Post.

It is part of trend that I've noticed lately:  the appeal to tribalism among global warming advocates.  It proceeds along the lines of "I'm a clergyman who believes in global warming.  Therefore, all people of faith should believe in global warming," or "I'm a prominent business executive.  Therefore, all people engaged in the private sector should believe in global warming."  Now comes Mr. Douglas with his take on the no true Scotsman fallacy, "I'm a Republican, I believe in global warming.  Therefore, no true Republican should doubt global warming."  (Don't worry, Mr. Douglas covers the Christianity and the capitalism, too.)

Of course, Mr. Douglas never comes out and says those exact words.  But in case you missed his message, New York Times climate blogger Andrew Revkin reframes Mr. Douglas' essay as "a Republican meteorologist tries to remove the liberal label from climate concern."  Indeed, the sub-headline of Douglas' piece as it appears at Shawn Otto's blog is "acknowledging climate science doesn’t make you a liberal."  (Shawn Otto is the husband of DFL Minnesota State Auditor Rebecca Otto.)

If I were trying to deliver a message to "my Republican friends," I doubt that I would choose the venues of the Huffington Post, Shawn Otto's blog, or the New York Times.  Mr. Douglas' true audience is the global warming community, which is in the midst of a furious rebranding effort for an issue that many associate with the broader liberal agenda.

Hence, Mr. Douglas is taking pains to position himself thusly, "I'm a moderate Republican, fiscally conservative; a fan of small government, accountability, self-empowerment and sound science.  I am not a climate scientist."

The real issue, is the one pointed out by the Times' Revkin,

"The challenge here, of course, is that the fight over climate science, to my mind, is a spillover from the more heated, and deeper, debate over climate policy.  As a result, even if the public had unfiltered, “perfect” information on greenhouse-driven climate change, uncertainties and all, that would hardly settle the public debate."  (Emphasis in the original)

Exactly.  The real issue lies not in recent weather patterns, the extent of past warming, or the nature of scientific proof, the subjects covered by Mr. Douglas in his piece.  No the real issue lies in what, if anything, we should do about it. 

Foreign affairs professor Walter Russell Mead has argued that the "one world government" approach advocated by Scientific American is doomed to failure.  All the other "solutions" bandied about by climate change advocates--carbon taxes, cap-and-trade, top-down-regulation--violate every one of the principles that Mr. Douglas claims to hold:  fiscally conservative; small government, accountability, self-empowerment, etc.

There is a strong case to be made for environmental protection based on property rights and markets, one that honors (small r) republican and (small c) conservative values.  Paul Douglas has not made that case.  Instead, he throws every liberal argument that I have ever heard preached toward conservatives against the wall--green jobs, Christian stewardship, carbon limits, nuclear power, more green jobs, energy independence, national security--hoping something, anything, will catch on with a non-liberal audience.

If you are a Republican, and the fate of the environment is something that keeps you up at night, here is what I suggest.  Check out the work of The Breakthrough Institute.  Its founders are not conservatives or Republicans, but their ideas about making clean energy cheap (and climate adaptation) are much more likely to produce useful results than making conventional energy too expensive to use.

Tom Steward's Piece on Keystone Protests Finds National Audience

The Freedom Foundation's Tom Steward has had great luck in getting his most recent piece on Minnesota environmental non-profits in front of a national audience.  A few links,

• Washington Times
• Breitbart's Big Government.com
• Look True North
• Freedom Foundation of Minnesota

Faith-Based Energy Policy

Victor Davis Hanson discusses the President's "faith-based energy policy."

Demography is Destiny

From The Atlantic, some thoughts about an aging American population and its impact on future economic growth.

Science vs. Democracy, Part 2

The InstaPundit brought to my attention another effort to set science and democracy in opposition.  Earlier this month, Gary Stix wrote on Scientific American's blog about how "Effective World Government Will Be Needed to Stave Off Climate Catastrophe."

My pre-buttal can be found in my essay from last month Science v. Democracy.

For his part, Mr. Stix believes that to save the world from global warming,

"I’ve come to the conclusion that the technical details are the easy part.  It’s the social engineering that’s the killer."

Not one to propose baby steps or half measures, Mr. Stix believes,

"To be effective, a new set of institutions would have to be imbued with heavy-handed, transnational enforcement powers."

[Shudder.]

Updated with Links: Tom Steward is Following the Money

The Freedom Foundation's Tom Steward continues his series following the money from out-of-state non-profits to Minnesota environmental groups.  A handy guide to the first four parts.

• Part 4--the anti-Keystone pipeline cash gusher
• Part 3--out-of-state cash used to drive policy agenda
• Part 2--Tom explains the RE-AMP network
• Part 1--Following the $48 million from out-of-state foundations for "grassroots" efforts

You should read the series all the way through.

The Anti-Keystone Cash Gusher

Minnesota's Freedom Foundation is following the money.  This time, the watchdog group is tracking foundation money flowing to Minnesota non-profits to fight the Keystone XL crude oil pipeline.  By the way, the pipeline will not even cross into the state.

The California Outback

Victor Davis Hanson continues to chronicle the decline of rural California, as the once-golden state descends into anarchy.  But has Hanson explains in this edition, the place is not without its charms.

David Strom is Following the Money

Over at Politics in Minnesota (subscription required), David Strom picks up the thread on the scandal that is Legacy Funding of the arts in Minnesota, building on this post that I did earlier this week.

Crude Oil Imports Drop to Lowest Level Since 1999

Thanks to increased domestic production, esp. in North Dakota.

Follow the Money: Tax $ and Transgressive Art, Part 2

I've now had the luxury of a few days to reflect on my earlier post reporting on the taxpayer subsidy for the Mixed Blood Theatre Company's production of Neighbors.

My biggest objection to the whole affair is the idea that taxpayers (through the state's Legacy Fund) should pay for professional theater to be free of charge to any theater-goer.  I object to the idea that live theater should become--like health care, schools lunches, or (in Europe anyway) free travel for vacations--a basic "human right" that the citizen expects the government to provide, free of charge.

Once upon a time, consumers were expected to pay for their own trips to the doctor, lunch for their children, holidays in the south of Spain, and yes, tickets to the theater.  Moral issues aside, basic economics requires a direct exchange of money for goods and services to ensure that the "right" amount of each good is provided.  Put another way, if the "government" provided free vacation travel, all 300 million of us would decamp to the Costa del Sol (it's nice, I've been there) and we'd never get anything done.

As for Mixed Blood's thinking behind the free-theater-for-all-concept of "Radical Hospitality," they write

"For Mixed Blood, radical hospitality has not only social, but also political and economic implications; Radical Hospitality exercises our commitment to justice."

Local media celebrate the decision to be generous with your money.  MinnPost writes,

"While the Mixed Blood has never really seemed to lack for an audience—every time I have been there, it's had a healthy attendance, and often sold out—[Artistic Director and founder Jack] Reuler realized that ticket costs were a barrier to attendance for many theatergoers.  This has been the source of considerable discussion in the theater world, as tickets prices have, on the whole, been rising, which risks discouraging any number of potential audience members."

Minnesota Public Radio explains how this is financially possible,

"When quizzed as to how Mixed Blood will meet its bills, Reuler says in the past box office receipts have only made up 15-18 percent of the annual budget, and there is enough money in reserve to make it through the first year at least."

Of course that "money in reserve" belongs to you, in the sales taxes you pay to the state.  The Minneapolis Star Tribune adds that,

"Revenue from ticket sales has been an important but declining part of the $1.4 million budget as the playhouse has ramped up fundraising efforts.  "Radical Hospitality" will be funded in part by foundations, individuals and the Legacy Amendment, said Reuler....'The costs are still there, but they are being borne by others,' said Reuler.  'Theaters get funding for programming, for operations and for special programs.  We're getting funding for our users, and putting them first.' "

In putting its audience first, Mixed Blood is putting your money first, as it explains on its website,

"Funding from the Minnesota Arts and Cultural Heritage Fund will support the launch of Radical Hospitality in 2011-12, with individual, corporate and philanthropic sponsorships sustaining no-cost admission beyond next season."

City Pages fills in some details,

"Starting September 16 [2011] with the opening of Branden Jacobs-Jenkins Neighbors, Mixed Blood Theatre will travel into the unknown.  Not with its offerings, but with ticket cost.  At that point, admission for anyone to all main stage productions will be free.

As for the kick-off production, City Pages notes that,

"Reuler saw Neighbors in Los Angeles and instantly knew the explosive comedy would be a fit for the theater even though it had several of his least favorite things, including being over two-hours long and having an intermission."

Ah, the explosive comedy that had patrons running for the exits.  Curious about the content of this play, and whether such audience revulsion had more to do with the play (the nature of the material presented) or with us (a squeamish, flyover demographic), I tracked down some reviews of other productions of Neighbors from the coasts.

The New York Times liked the play, but their review spends at least ten paragraphs wringing their hands over the controversial elements in the show.

The Los Angeles Times wrote about the play back in 2010, opening with the sentence,

"Just when you thought beer summits were so 2009, Branden Jacobs-Jenkins’ bracing satire “Neighbors,” now at the Matrix Theatre, turns up to mess with your lazy liberal self."

The Times notes that author "Jacob-Jenkins knows that rage plays best as savage humor, and he takes us to excruciatingly awkward places--and then leaves us to fend for ourselves."

Back to the East Coast, the Boston Globe covers the play and reveals that the audience reaction was exactly what its Fulbright-winning playwright intended,

"The playwright’s aim in the interludes is to bring audience members to a place of complicated emotion, where humor mingles with grotesquerie.  'What happens when you take those kinds of ideas as far as you can go?' he asked. 'Then it becomes something that you don’t want to look at.' "

The Globe adds an interesting footnote on the earlier, New York production,

"At the Public Theater in New York, where “Neighbors’’ was staged last year, the play was heckled three times, Jacobs-Jenkins said.  It also attracted a small, angry group who came to every talkback — and to an event uptown at the Juilliard School — and attempted to shame him."

Perhaps, then, it wasn't us after all.

The impeccably liberal Huffington Post reports on the Boston production and asks the tough questions, like,

"Is it an offensive play because it re-awakens appalling stereotypes from a painful past without offering new answers?"

"Most important:  What do we want from theater, from art?  To ensconce the sacred?  To capture some mythological universality about experience and history?  To splay our deepest anxieties and catastrophes -- as a country, community or individual-across a stage?"

My answer?  Do whatever you want, just do it with your own money.

Follow The Money: Tax $ and Transgressive Art, Part 1

In October of 2011, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reviewed Neighbors, a production of the local Mixed Blood Theatre Company.  The Star Tribune reported,

"Some patrons have walked out in the middle of the play.  Others have seen it more than once."

" 'I felt like I had been assaulted after seeing it,' Twin Cities actor Greta Oglesby said."

What was the controversial subject matter that had theater patrons running for the exits, or coming back for more?  After checking with this website's Standards and Practices Department, it turns out that we can't discuss the subject matter or the controversial content.  Let's just say that if you recall the famous "pastry love" scene from the movie American Pie, this production ups the ante.

You, Dear Reader, will have to see for yourself,

• October 8, 2011--Minnesota Public Radio, "Adventures in uncomfortable theater"
• October 7, 2011--Star Tribune, "Play's [redacted] offends, engages"
• September 23, 2011--St. Paul Pioneer Press
• September 22, 2011--Star Tribune

A quote from that September 22nd review,

"Neighbors, which also kicks off Mixed Blood's Radical Hospitality initiative of expanded access through free admission, is no walk in the park.  A few patrons left during Wednesday night's performance, an occurrence sure to be repeated."
Those leaving the show couldn't demand their money back, since, courtesy of the state's taxpayers, admission was free.  It turns out that the Theatre's Radical Hospitality is entirely at your expense.  How did Minnesota taxpayers come to subsidize such "transgressive" art?  It's a long, but engaging story.

The Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment was a 2008 change to Minnesota's Constitution, which added a dedicated 3/8ths of a percent sales tax on top of the existing tax rate.

Sold as a way to bypass the stingy Legislature and raise funds to save the environment, the Legacy Fund includes a less-publicised provision that provides about 20 percent of the total taxes collected for a dedicated "Arts and Cultural Heritage Fund."

Of course, any time you involve taxpayer money and art, problems will arise.  Arise they did, with an early controversy involving the payment of $45,000 to a local author (plus $2,700 in "travel" expenses) for a four-hour appearance at a regional library.

Because of the mechanistic operations of the Fund, Minnesota taxpayers will pump some $1.2 billion over the life of the Amendment, or a little under $50 million a year, into Art and Cultural Heritage projects.  It is inevitable that some this money will support some less than popular projects.

Take, from the example above, Legacy Fund support for the Minneapolis-based Mixed Blood Theatre Company.  According to its most recent IRS Form 990 filing, Mixed Blood is a $1.5 million-a-year professional operation with 115 employees, organized as a 501(c)(3) charitable, non-profit organization.

Founded in 1976 by its current artistic director, the Theatre has accumulated an impressive collection of awards over the years.  It has also been successful in attracting funds from private sources, including more than $600,000 over the past eight years from the McKnight Foundation.

Mixed Blood has staged controversial fare before.  Its very first production, back in 1976, was Dutchman, by Amiri Baraka (born Everett LeRoi Jones in Newark, New Jersey).  In 2002, Mr. Baraka's home state honored his work by naming him the state's second Poet Laureate.  After writing a controversial poem about the September 11, 2001 attacks on nearby Manhattan, then New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevey attempted to fire Baraka.  That effort failed, but the New Jersey State Legislature eliminated the position of Laureate in 2003.

Mixed Blood has staged two plays by Nobel-prize-winning Italian playwright Dario Fo.  You may recall Mr. Fo's 2006 unsuccessful run for Mayor of Milan, in a bid backed by the Communist Refoundation Party.

More disturbing is the 1985 production of In the Belly of the Beast, by Jack Henry Abbott.  Abbott was an author and convicted murderer, whose 1981 parole was supported by famous author Norman Mailer.  Six weeks after his release, Abbott stabbed another man to death.  So, at the time of the 1985 production, Abbott was already back in prison for his second killing.  Abbott committed suicide in prison in 2002.

Mixed Blood has produced more mainstream plays over the years, including three by the Pulitzer-prize winning (and now conservative) playwright David Mamet, the hit musical Avenue Q, and the anti-Reagan satire Rap Master Ronnie by Doonesbury cartoonist Garry Trudeau.

But what makes the controversial Neighbors unique is that the play was entirely underwritten by taxpayer money.  In 2011, Mixed Blood received a Legacy Fund grant of $191,648.  The award notes,

"To revolutionize access, Mixed Blood proposes FREE THEATRE-no-cost access to productions, eliminating the economic barrier to more effectively engage underrepresented populations."

This Legacy grant was part of a total of more than $470,000 in Legacy funds that Mixed Blood received in 2011, alone.

Minnesota is no stranger to controversies surrounding public funding of the arts.  Performance artist Karen Finley famously poured chocolate over herself at Minneapolis' Walker Art Center as part of a National Endowment for the Arts-funded show.

More broadly--whether the topic is the photography of artists Robert Mapplethorpe or Andres Serrano, or the religious-themed work of British painter Chris Ofili--the idea has taken hold that criticism of taxpayer-funded art is beyond the pale.  Only a craven censor would deny unlimited, public funding to transgressive art, and the more controversial, the better.

Expect to see more boundary-pushing work along the lines of Neighbors as the state government doles out its $ billions in public funding.  Under an application of Gresham's law (bad money drives out good), artists and arts organizations will necessarily save the most transgressive work for public money, as private donors or ticket buyers tend to demand accountability for use of their money.  Government funding carries no accountability whatsoever, for to do so would represent an act of unthinkable censorship.

Part 2 of this series continues the discussion.

The Morality of Liberalism

As explained by Victor Davis Hanson.

The End of Environmentalism?

Perhaps a bit premature, but Steven Hayward at Power Line chronicles what he sees as the death throes of the modern environmentalist movement.  He may be on to something, calling attention to this Washington Post piece about the decline in interest amongst the young.

Follow the Money: Charity and Politics

In this edition, we examine how money flows between charitable, tax-exempt organizations and candidates running for public office with the endorsement of Minnesota's Democratic-Farmer-Labor (DFL) party.  "Money laundering" is too harsh a term, as all of these transactions are strictly legal and fully reported.  But money is fungible, so a dollar put into the system at one end, frees up a dollar for use at the other end and vice versa.

I am not saying that individuals or institutions are giving money to charities with the intent to influence the political process or to circumvent campaign finance laws.  But such donations may, indirectly, produce that exact result.

As a case study, we take the example of the Minneapolis-based McKnight Foundation.  McKnight is a $2-billion-asset charitable foundation, administering a private fortune earned through the 3M corporation.  It is organized as a Section 501(c)(3) exempt private foundation.  As a 501(c)(3) [the number refers to a section of the tax code], donations to the Foundation can be tax deductible to the donor, income earned by the Foundation is exempt from income taxes, but the entity is restricted on the amount of political activity and lobbying that it may engage in.

From 2004 through 2011, McKnight donated a total of $475,000 to Conservation Minnesota, a Minneapolis-based environmental non-profit.  I have previously documented ([1], [2] and [3]) the work of Conservation Minnesota and its related entities, so I won't repeat that material here.

According to IRS Form 990 filings, Conservation Minnesota, like McKnight, is organized as 501(c)(3) charity.  An affiliated organization, the Conservation Minnesota Voter Center, is organized as a 501(c)(4).  The two organizations share an Executive Director, staff and office space.

A 501(c)(4) differs from the charity form in some key elements.  Donations to (c)(4) organizations are not tax deductible.  The income tax exemptions enjoyed by (c)(4) entities are not as broad as for (c)(3) groups, but (c)(4) groups operate under fewer restrictions on lobbying and political campaigning.

According to its IRS Form 990 (Schedule I), for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2011, $50,000 actually flowed upstream from the (c)(4) Voter Center to the (c)(3) charity.

The Conservation Minnesota Voter Center has, according to its IRS 990 filings, a related entity:  the Conservation Minnesota Voter Fund.  The Voter Fund is organized as a "527" entity.  A 527 organization is another form of tax-exempt entity and has fewer restrictions on its activity than a 501(c)(4).  However, a 527 must publicly disclose its donors and its spending activity, unlike the 501(c)(3) or (c)(4).

The Voter Fund is required to, and does, file reports with Minnesota's Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board.  For the 2010 election year, the Voter Fund listed total expenditures of $166,736.98.  Expenditures by the Fund included reimbursement of the Center of over $77,000 of their costs.  The Fund, like other such entities, does not donate money directly to candidates.  Instead, it spends money, independently, to support or defeat individual candidates.

But the Fund can, and does, donate money to political party units, such as the DFL's House of Representatives Caucus ($7,000 in 2010).  The DFL House Caucus donates money up to the state party, the Minnesota DFL (almost $2,000,000 in 2010).  The state-level unit, can, and does donate money directly to candidates (a mere $4,000 in 2010).

To take another example, in 2011, the McKnight Foundation donated $60,000 to the St. Paul-based TakeAction Minnesota Education Fund.  TakeAction Minnesota is a coalition of 26 organizations, most of which (14) are labor unions.  TakeAction consists of the charitable 501(c)(3) Education Fund (the McKnight grantee) and a 501(c)(4) entity.

According to TakeAction's IRS Form 990 filings, the two TakeAction entities share an Executive Director, staff, facilities, and mission statement (Line 1).  They have two related 527 organizations, the TakeAction Political Action Committee (PAC) and the TakeAction Political Fund.

TakeAction engages in its political activity under the name reNEW Minnesota Campaign.  The MinnPost news website reported in September 2010 that TakeAction endorsed 12 candidates for the November general election, all DFL members.

MinnPost reported,

"DFLer Mark Dayton's bid for governor was endorsed Sunday by TakeAction Minnesota, no big surprise since the group exists to help elect progressive candidates and neither Republican Tom Emmer or Independence Party candidate Tom Horner fit that bill.

"More than 200 of the group's members showed up and gave Dayton the endorsement on the first ballot.  TakeAction Minnesota is the parent organization of reNew.mn, the group that was deeply involved in the DFL convention held in Duluth at the end of April.  About 150 reNew.mn members went through the caucus process and were elected to be convention delegates, promising to work together to select a DFL candidate that shared their progressive vision."

According to reports filed at the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, in 2010 the TakeAction PAC spent more than $135,000 on the campaign.  The PAC reimbursed the (c)(4) entity more than $117,000 for expenses.  The PAC donated $406 of in kind services (phone bank space) directly to two candidates, and donated a total of more than $4,500 in cash and in kind services to the state DFL party.

The TakeAction Political Fund (a separate unit) spent more than $45,000 on the 2010 campaign.  The Fund lists as a contribution almost $40,000 of in kind services (canvassing) from the (c)(4) entity.

In the end, the effort paid off, as TakeAction-endorsed DFL candidate Mark Dayton won the race for Governor in a recount.  The almost Governor-elect (the recount would not end until December) appeared at the November 19th TakeAction Minnesota 2010 Annual Leadership Awards Dinner to personally thank the organization for its efforts.

Follow the Money: Politics and Puppets, Part 3

From a Network tip comes another example of taxpayer-funded, left-wing puppetry.  [See Part 1 and Part 2]  Grand Marais, Minnesota, lies on the scenic North Shore of Lake Superior, between Duluth and Thunder Bay, Ontario.  This summer tourist-haven hosts, among other cultural attractions, the Good Harbor Hill Players, a community theater and puppet group.

Using money from the state's Legacy fund, the Duluth-based Arrowhead Regional Arts Council provided the Players with a $4,000 grant in 2011 "to produce the Summer Solstice outdoor puppet pageant on June 29, 2011."

It turns out that not everyone was happy with the Players' mid-summer festival last year.  Bill Hanna, the Executive Editor of the Mesabi Daily News (located in the heart of the state's iron mining region), wrote an editorial in his paper on September 4, 2011, objecting to the anti-mining content of the Players' production, writing,

"The program for the play leaves no question of its viewpoint.  Ducks are shown walking around wetlands with signs that read “Quack,” while mining officials are depicted as foxes extracting minerals for profit from the ducks’ water home."

In case the audience didn't get the message from the papier-mâché, Hanna notes that the written program notes spelled it out,

“The proposed sulfide mining in both the Boundary Waters and St. Louis River watersheds is a serious threat to our northern Minnesota ecosystem and culture."

Hanna's specific objection to the production is that it was staged at a facility, the North House Folk School, which is subsidized by iron-mining royalties through the state agency Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board (IRRRB).  Hanna documents $59,500 in IRRRB grants to the School, including money for improvements to the outdoor space where the Players performed their 2011 show.  Indeed, it was reported that IRRRB board members were not amused by the turn of events.

A follow-up September 10, 2011 opinion piece in the Daily News makes a good point,

"If the Good Harbor Hill Players who put on the Solstice Puppet Pageant and the North House Folk School folks who knew of the play’s content in advance of its presentation are so repulsed by mining, then they should have the Sierra Club or some other anti-jobs-from-mining preservationist group write a check for the school’s capital improvements."

No doubt, the Players have a right to say whatever they want about mining or any other subject.  But do we have an obligation as taxpayers to pay for such overtly political content and the site on which it is performed?

The Regulatory Leviathan

Over at Private Citizen Media, I post a second excerpt of the forthcoming book.  This post focuses on the regulatory state and how it works to strangle job creation.

Follow the Money: Politics and Puppets, Part 2

Yesterday, I dug into the subject of taxpayer sponsorship of Marxist puppet shows.  Today, I dig a little deeper, but first, a history lesson.

During the 2010 Minnesota Governor’s race, a kerfuffle broke out over corporate donations in support of the Republican candidate, State Rep. Tom Emmer.  Most notably, left-wing groups, including MoveOn.org, attempted to organize a boycott of Target department stores over a $150,000 donation to an Emmer-friendly political group.

Other corporations had made donations to the Emmer-backing group, but I suppose the Target contribution was most galling because the company had been founded by the family of the Democratic candidate, Mark Dayton.  In the end, Dayton won and Emmer lost in a recount.

In examining In the Heart of the Beast Puppet and Mask Theatre, I noticed the familiar red bull’s-eye logo of Target in the bottom, right-hand corner of the About Us page.  As you will recall from yesterday’s post, the Theatre is named after a saying popularized by Argentine Marxist revolutionary Che Guevara.

Sure enough, IRS Form 990 records of the non-profit Target Foundation reveal that the company’s charitable arm is indeed a patron of the Theatre that, as Minnesota Public Radio reports, “wears its political heart on its sleeve” (cue the laugh track).

In its 2011 fiscal year, the Target Foundation donated $40,000 to the Theatre.  Target also gave $40,000 in 2010 and the same amount the previous year.

Then again, come to think of it, the bull’s-eye is red, after all.

Follow the Money: Politics and Puppets, Part 1

The Institute on the Environment will be hosting U.K. environmental theologian Martin Palmer on May 23rd as part of the Institute's Momentum event series.  Appearing along with Mr. Palmer will be Minneapolis' In the Heart of the Beast Puppet and Mask Theatre.

Heart of the Beast was the subject of a minor controversy in 2009, when the group was one of the recipients of a National Endowment for the Arts stimulus (ARRA) grant.  The $25,000 grant was denounced by many critics as wasteful.  Typical of the coverage was this UPI report, which cites the criticism of Republican Senators John McCain and Tom Coburn, who noted "a liberal-leaning theater in Minnesota received $100,000 (sic) for socially conscious puppet shows."

Competing Narratives: MN's Frontier vs. the Miracle

Over at Private Citizen Media, I post an except from the forthcoming book.  The excerpt addresses Minnesota's competing narratives:  the rugged individualists of the Frontier vs. the mass collectivism of the Miracle.

The College Cultural Gap

The InstaPundit links to this piece at New Geography, where Matthew Stevenson maps the college cultural gap.  The quote caught my eye,
"When Britain still had an Empire, what mattered most was to get your daughters married and your sons into a good regiment.   In Homeland America, all that matters to middle-class and affluent parents is getting their children into the best colleges that money can buy or that the Standardized Aptitude Test will allow."

Walter Russell Mead on the Future of Housing

In his Beyond Big Blue, Part 7, Walter Russell Mead takes a look at the future of housing.  Mentioning work by Joel Kotkin on the subject, Mead points out a couple of trends that seem to be escaping the new urbanist conventional wisdom,

"Surveys do suggest that Millennials actually prefer living in the humble detached home to unaffordable yuppie pods on top of tram lines, but something much more interesting may be happening.  Home improvement companies like Lowe’s and Home Depot report an uptick in the number of investors into multi-generational homes, or homes with integrated professional office spaces.  Some builders, like Pulte Homes and Lennar, are even specializing in ‘multi-generational’ homes with cordoned-off space for Millennials, Baby Boomers, and grandparents to live and maybe work under one roof."

Follow the Money: When Philanthropy Goes Wrong

In the weekend Wall Street Journal, Adam Meyerson has a column (subscription required) headlined "When Philanthropy Goes Wrong," describing how foundations stray from the founders' intent.  Meyerson quotes from Henry Ford II's resignation letter from the board of his grandfather's Ford Foundation.  Ford II wrote in 1977,

"The foundation is a creature of capitalism, a statement that, I'm sure, would be shocking to many professional staff people in the field of philanthropy.  It is hard to discern recognition of this fact in anything the foundation does."

Shocking and true words 35 years ago.  Shocking and true words today.

David Strom on Voters and Democracy

My friend David Strom has a piece in the Capitol Report under the headline "Voters get no respect."  The link is to a subscriber only page.

Keith Downey on the Right to Work Issue

Minnesota is not a "Right to Work" state, although there are efforts at the state legislature to join Indiana in prohibiting the practice of forcing non-members to pay union dues.

My State Rep., Keith Downey (R-Edina), writes on the issue in a St. Paul Pioneer Press opinion piece headlined, "Why 'right to work' would be good for workers and their unions."

Downey makes the point that in making union dues-paying voluntary, unions would become more competitive by having to show members the benefits of membership.  He writes,

"In fact, right-to-work is a growth opportunity for labor.  In fact, it is the real future for unions.  Let workers organize, freely, in the competitive marketplace of ideas, talent and effectiveness.  Reduce state interference. That's not hazardous; that brings out the best in people.

"Under right-to-work, collective bargaining is left untouched.  Unions will, of course, still exist.  And they will flourish when they add value to employees and employers, not because they've fenced out the competition and forced membership.

"This will bring out the best in organized labor.  It will restore the traditional role of unions we all respect and admire--adding value to workers with training and certifications, and adding value to employers and consumers by improving service and quality.  Add more value than cost, and wages and profits increase too."

Here Downey is channeling Walter Russell Mead, who writes about the future of work and jobs in his series "Beyond Blue."  In Mead's Beyond Blue Part 5, 'Jobs, Jobs, Jobs", he writes about the future of labor unions,

"But in the labor market of the future, workers are less likely to need bargaining agents who improve their working conditions and pay through a rule-making process at their long-term employer.  They are more likely to need a kind of career agent who helps them negotiate work contracts for short term gigs and develop a long term plan to keep their skills sharp and move with a changing economy into new fields.  Fewer of us will build careers by lifetime service to a single firm; more of us will seek improved pay and more agreeable work by switching companies and even fields.  Fewer of us will be represented by the successors of Jimmy Hoffa; more of us will have a personal Michael Ovitz on call."

State-of-the-art skills and training, representing individual workers as they move from one short-term job to the next, this scenario sounds like it was tailor-made for a 21st-century, free-market version of the traditional "craft" unions or even the older medieval guilds.

Peter Nelson Writes on Clean Hydro Power

Over at the Center of the American Experiment, Peter Nelson writes on the wisdom of hydro power and efforts at the Minnesota Legislature to promote this important source of clean electricity.

America's Petroleum Exports Exceed Imports

The U.S. Government's Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports that for the first time since 1949, America's petroleum exports exceeded its imports in 2011.

Now it's true that we are still a net importer of crude oil, importing almost half of the crude oil we need, but our exports of gasoline, diesel fuel and the like, now exceed our imports of those products.  Good news for America and it indicates an area where we can increase jobs.

The Truth About Energy Subsidies

In the debate over energy subsidies, you will hear all kinds of claims.  One side complains about massive subsidies for fossil fuels and the other side complains about huge subsidies for renewable power, like wind and solar.

Where does the truth lie?  Last summer (July 2011), the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration (EIA) issued a study examining this issue for electricity generation.  The study looked at all sources of Federal subsidies, including direct subsidy, tax credits, R&D, loan guarantees, etc.

The EIA found that for fiscal year 2010, subsidies to all electricity sources totaled $11.9 billion dollars.  Of that total, renewables received 55.3 percent.  Nuclear received 21 percent and coal received 10 percent.

When looking at subsidy shares relative to production levels, the differentials are even more startling.  Wind alone receives 42.0 percent of the total 2010 subsidies, while accounting for only 2.3 percent of total electricity production that year.

Nuclear received 21 percent of the total 2010 dollars, while producing 19.6 percent of the total electricity generated.  Coal received 10 percent of the subsidy dollars, while producing 44.9 percent of America's electricity.

On a per unit basis, the outcome is even more lopsided.  Think of 5 cents/kWh as a benchmark price for "grid" power.  Wind power's per unit federal subsidy totaled 5.25 cents per kWh in 2010, arguably an amount greater than the actual value of the power.  Nuclear received a federal subsidy equal to 0.31 cents per kWh.  Coal's subsidy accounted for a mere 0.06 cents per kWh.  On a relative, per unit basis, wind receives a subsidy 82 times as large as coal power's subsidy.  Comparing wind to nuclear on a relative, per unit basis, the federal subsidy of wind is 17 times bigger.

Solar power received 8.2 percent of the total federal subsidy dollars.  Its share of total 2010 electricity production rounds to zero percent.  On a per unit basis, solar received a subsidy of 96.8 cents per kWh.  That is a subsidy 1,507 times bigger than coal.

Renewable energy received most of the federal energy subsidy dollars.  On a per unit basis, renewables subsidies dwarf those available to conventional power.

The Boston Tea Party and the Revolution

Over at Private Citizen Media, David Strom writes about the first Boston Tea party and this historical parallels with the modern Tea Party Movement.  It is a short and useful history lesson.

Follow the Money: Politics in Minnesota

The Daily Caller continues its investigation into the connections between leftwing politics and the world of non-profits.  The latest installment examines a series of front groups organized by SEIU.  Daily Caller writes,

"The politically aggressive Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has quietly created a national network of at least eight community-organizing groups, some of which function alongside the Occupy Wall Street movement, a Daily Caller investigation shows.  Incorporated by the SEIU as local non-profits, the groups are waging concerted local political campaigns to publicly attack conservative political figures, banks, energy companies and other corporations."

You had to know that one of these groups would be based in Minnesota.  Minnesotans for a Fair Economy doesn't trumpet the SEIU connection.  Photo ID for voting appears to be a big issue of late.  Another group to keep your eye on.

Human Capital Bonds, Part 6

Catching up from the weekend, Minneapolis Star Tribune business columnist Neal St. Anthony interviews local non-profit executive Steve Rothschild in yesterday's newspaper.  The interview touches on many of the themes that I have been developing in this space, such as redesigning government services and the use of human capital bonds.  The interview is a good introduction to the subject.

Doug Wardlow on "America's Turning Point"

Over at Private Citizen Media I posted an essay by Minnesota State Representative Doug Wardlow, who represents the Eagan area of the southeast metro.  Rep. Wardlow writes on "America's Turning Point" and draws some interesting parallels between the end of the Roman Empire and our current situation.

Follow the Money: The Profit Behind Non-Profit

Nationally syndicated radio talk-show host Jason Lewis (Minnesota-based) has a commentary in Sunday's Minneapolis Star Tribune on the world of local non-profits.  Lewis notes that nationally, non-profits control $650 billion in assets and have income of $60 billion, collectively. 

Lewis also notes that so many non-profits seem to engage in activities far removed from anyone's idea of "charity."  Clearly, reform is needed.

Science v. Democracy, 2

Scientists at Cornell argue that people are too stupid to rule themselves.  I, of course, disagree.

Feed in Tariff Fail

Germany to cut solar subsidies 30 percent, reports the UK's Guardian.

Keith Downey on Priciples for Government Reform

I just posted a previously unpublished opinion piece by my state representative Keith Downey (R-Edina) on five principles for government reform.  Keith has been a leader of the Reform 2.0 effort in the state legislature.

Thought for the day

On this first day of March,

"And Winter, slumbering in the open air,
Wears on his smiling face a dream of Spring !"

--Samuel Taylor Coleridge

The Future of the Single Family Home

The future of the single family is home is looking bright.  Futurist Joel Kotkin explains how the Smart Growth crowd is getting is wrong.

A Big Thanks to Katherine Kersten

Katherine Kersten, occasional Minneapolis Star Tribune columnist, was our guest speaker this evening at the monthly meeting of SD49 Republicans (SW Metro).  She discussed her study for the Center of the American Experiment on the state's educational achievement gap.  Sobering stuff.

Doomed to Fail: the Public Urban Food Forest

Where to start with this one.  I assumed it must be a joke.  But no, the City of Seattle municipal government is literally trying to recreate the Garden of Eden on 7 acres of bare ground in the City.  Billing the project as the nation's largest public food forest, the City is spending $100,000 to plant trees...for food...for the public.

How will it end?  I have my money on the future homeless encampment burning the trees for firewood before they can mature enough to bear fruit.

Daniel Hannan on Post-Modern Lawmaking

Great video from Daniel Hannan, another one of his 1 minute speeches before the European Parliament.  This time, he calls attention to the EU trying to create jobs by decree, while destroying jobs through its every action.

Follow the Money: Politics and Environmentalism Part 3, Tides Edition

Building on the first two parts of this sequence ([1] and [2]), I take a look at the relationships between the Tides Foundation, Minnesota environmentalists, and state Democrats.  (In Minnesota, the Democrats belong the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party (DFL).)

The San Francisco-based Tides Foundation and the associated Tides Center work to promote progressive causes, including issues such as "environmental sustainability."  Examining the Foundation's IRS 990 forms for the years 2008 through 2010 reveals some interesting Minnesota connections.

In 2008, an election year, the Tides donated to, among others, three Minnesota groups including the Democratic party-related political groups Alliance for a Better Minnesota (Education Fund) and WIN Minnesota, along with the environmental group Conservation Minnesota.

As Minnesota Public Radio (MPR) documented in a compelling graphic, $ millions flowed from WIN Minnesota to the Alliance for a Better Minnesota in the last election cycle to influence the governor's race.  Among the Directors of WIN Minnesota  is Alida Messinger, a Rockefeller heiress and ex-wife of current DFL Governor Mark Dayton (the 2010 winner).  As MPR also documents, Ms. Messinger is one of the state's largest DFL political donors.

At the time of Tides' 2008 donation to Conservation Minnesota, one of its directors was Bill Grant, who now serves in the Dayton Administration as Director of the Division of Energy Resources.

In 2009, a non-election year, Tides made another donation to WIN Minnesota, along with donations to the Minnesota environmental groups Fresh Energy and the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA) for the Tides' Tar Sands Campaign.

At the time of the 2009 donation, the MCEA was headed by Interim Executive Director Paul Aasen.  Mr. Aasen now serves in Gov. Dayton's cabinet, as Commissioner of the Pollution Control Agency.  Then and now, Fresh Energy was headed by Michael Noble.

In 2010, another election year, the Tides made another donation to MCEA for the Tar Sands program and more donations to the Alliance for a Better Minnesota Education Fund and WIN Minnesota.

Today, Alida Messinger and Michael Noble serve together on the board of Conservation Minnesota's Voter Fund political arm.

The donations I've discussed total a mere $335,000 over those three years, a drop in the bucket to the $48 million Tom Steward documents in his Follow the Money series.  But these donations do reveal some interesting interconnections (the Iron Triangle) between a leading national progressive foundation, and local DFL party and environmental non-profits.

Expect more "connect-the-dots" work in this space.